Self-Defense Tip: Give it Up

Once again, I’m not 100 percent down with a First Person Defender entertrainment video. In the first scenario, Gunblast guy should have surrendered his money. In the second, Ol’ Twin Beard needed to inflict some serious hurt on his attacker. You know: speed, surprise and violence of action. Only there’s not a lot of surprise in a Simunition simulation and you can’t practice real violence without full protective gear. But it’s the first lesson that I’d like to highlight. There are times when compliance is your best option. Gun or no gun. Training or no training . . .

It’s entirely possible to find yourself so far behind the self-defense curve that all you can do is whatever the bad guy tells you to do. Especially if it’s just stuff he/she/they want. Here’s a real world example where fighting back was not the ideal response:

A hot dog vendor at a Ferguson Home Depot was robbed of his cellphone and struck in the head with a hammer by four shoplifters. The incident occurred around 3 p.m on Wednesday. The Home Depot is located in St. Louis County at the 10900 block of New Halls Ferry Road.

Reading further at thegatewaypundit.com, we discover that the sequence of events was not quite as straightforward as the lead suggests.

Authorities said the hot dog vendor was standing at the front entrance of the Home Depot in the 10900 block of New Halls Ferry Rd. around 3 p.m. when four shoplifters walked by and swiped his cell phone.

Police said the vendor chased them out of the store, but was struck in the head with a hammer one of the suspects had stolen. The suspects then got in a car and drove away.

The bloodied victim was transported to the hospital with serious injuries.

Obviously, it’s best to avoid violent confrontations altogether. Stay away from stupid people in stupid places doing stupid things. Maintain situational awareness. Like that. But sometimes a potential beat down—or worse—finds you. And when it does, if you can trade your stuff for the cessation of hostilities, do it.

I know: giving up your stuff is no guarantee that you won’t be attacked. There are plenty of examples of victims who complied fully with criminals’ demands and got a beat down or shot or raped anyway. For “no good reason.”

Notice I said if you can avoid a violent confrontation by giving up your stuff. How can you know whether the bad guy or bad guys will be satisfied with stuff? You can’t.

It’s going to be an adrenalin-infused risk assessment informed by subconscious cues. In other words, you’ll probably react to the circumstances rather than act based on logical analysis of the situation. But you can go in with the mindset that stuff is negotiable. Whereas your life and the life of your loved ones is not. Obviously.

If nothing else, surrendering stuff can buy you time. If an assault caught you on the hop (the perennial problem for someone being attacked) giving it up may afford you the opportunity to launch a speed, surprise and violence of action counterattack. You’re not abandoning the option of an armed/physical defense. You’re postponing it.

One thing is for sure: practicing shooting from a retention position at close quarters is an excellent idea. Just like letting go of your valuables to increase your self-defense options, hip-shooting skills increase the possibility of a successful self defense.

comments

A hot dog vendor probably isn’t rich. That phone is not just “stuff.” It is his connection to jobs, it is worth a lot of money. A $500 iPhone could be six months of savings for him. I wouldn’t pooh pooh the theft of a phone.

And there is a moral component too. Allowing criminals to escape without consequence is immoral. If you can stop them then you should. Sometimes it doesn’t work, but it’s still important to not just give in without some kind of effort to stop them.

Amen. Compliance does not automatically equate to safety. If you can’t read minds, then you really don’t know what the thug will do. Compliance didn’t help the folks on the airplanes during 911. There was a restaurant near where I grew up, got robbed with the robbers herding the folks into the freezer. They then shot each in the head.

It is a huge risk and a judgement call and you won’t know whether you’re making the right call until it’s over. If you live through it with minor injuries, you made the right call.

This actually highlights the need for armed-self defense. If it’s 1 v 4 and one of the four grabs your stuff then unless you are armed you are out your cellphone. Using a firearm at this point is out of the question since your life hasn’t been threatened and you would become the aggressor. This scenario is a good reason to carry pepper spray because you can slow them down or disable them allowing the cops to get there in time to make an arrest.

I guess he could have taken their photo and maybe the license plate if they had a car and then called the police. Oh wait a minute, they had his phone.

There are very few people who could have “made an [accurate] note of their “appearance” as rapidly as this event unfolded. I have the training and I don’t think I could have done it with sufficient accuracy for the cops to make an identification. “Officer, one of the four guys in hoodies who could have been the President’s son grabbed my cellphone.” I’m sure that would have been good enough for the police to track them down.

At best they will note the information in a “Be on the lookout for” sheet that is uploaded to the car computer or handed out at shift changes. But it will be among a hundred items at your typical department and unlikely to stand out unless the person is arrested for an unrelated offense.

Just as the police have no duty to protect you, they have no requirement to actually solve your crime. Even if you give them cellphone tracking information, or make a note that the phone is still one (which means traceable if you make a formal request to the provider), many departments will do nothing as it isn’t a major enough crime for them to assign man power.

I hate to say it, but anything short of armed robbery you are better off preventing the crime, as the police aren’t going to do anything with your report.

The reality I’ve seen in life and heard from others’ first-hand experiences paints a much more nuanced picture. Four guys with underwear exposed at 2 am outside a gas station or deli is not the same as one bedraggled guy in daylight on a business-district street. It is essential to learn to spot predators as opposed to desperate clowns.

There are no simple rules in SD, are there? Rather there is something resembling a ten-page computer program with lots of “If…else” statements. It’s no different than business or investing in that regard. Rules are nice but flexible informed judgment is much better. And I note that most of the big gun gurus past and present live out in the desert or the exurbs. Rule number one is “make money and move away from crime and crowds.” Rule number 2 is “if you can’t afford a safe neighborhood you probably can’t afford a week at Gunsite.”

Instead of pepper spray, which is illegal in many high-crime locales, how about a can of spray paint? A little Krylon in the face will (a) semipermanently mark the perp, and (b) probably drop them to the ground screaming like their baby sister. In that case the rest would have scattered like the insects they are.

While shooting someone in a public place because they stole your ‘phone would net you a bushel of badness in most locales, drawing on the sh¡t(s) and demanding they set it down would not, especially were they to threaten you in any way when confronted.

Your mileage might vary with locale, of course, but in most places in which one may carry one may use.

Also, for someone like our hotdog vendor a gun might be a difficult expense. Further, there are many locations in which he couldn’t wear it.

An inexpensive option for people in such a situation is a gardening machete in scabbard. It’s legal in most places, and unless your wearing a suit most people really don’t notice because it comes off as a tool rather than a weapon.

Granted it’s no firearm, but it’s still quite effective and not a little terrifying — even against a gaggle of East St. Louisans.

Each scenario is unique; I’m not out to commit suicide, but in the end, I’m not carrying a gun to protect my “stuff”, I’m carrying a gun to defend my freedom.

My dignity, my self-respect, my right to be free from a tyrant forcing me with a threat or actual use of violence to enslave me. To make into a thing, a non-entity, to used and abused at will of a human predator that looks at me and my humanity with absolute and utter contempt.

This might be for only the moment when this predator takes my wallet at gun point, but the memory of that emotional rape, of the soul tearing violation of all that I am as a free human being will be with me for the rest of my life. That is not a memory, even if it is almost certain death, I choose to live with.

That is what caused me to fight that mugger so many years ago, even though I had no gun, even though the predator faked having a gun in his pocket, it could have been real, but I fought him anyway. I would rather risk injury or death than to bow down and become that predators property, his slave, for even one moment.

There is a time when it is good to runaway to fight another day; a strategic retreat is at times appropriate; each person will have to decide for themselves if that is what is being done, if that is what is needed; but there is always the question, when is it time to stop and fight, even when you know it is certain death?

Each scenario is unique, after thinking about various possibilities, if four guys approached me and threatened me directly to steal my phone, I would use lethal force to defend myself; if my phone was sitting on a table or desk and they swiped it as they ran by, I would give a good description of the thieves, to the cops; but the many scenarios I imagined by chasing after them after the deed was done, most didn’t have a good ending for anyone.

In that situation, I would just put it down to a lesson learned and not leave my valuables out where a thief would have such easy access.

Many years ago, before I had a child but while I was married, I also decided to fight off two muggers. And, like your situation, one of them was pretending he had a gun in his pocket. I “knew” it wasn’t a gun and decided to fight back. It all worked out in the end. They ran off. The police actually came when reported. And because the two youths were dumb enough to continue mugging people in the area rather than hop on the L and get out of there, the police were able to arrest them within an hour. All that being said, looking back, fighting two youths over my wallet was one of the dumbest things that I have ever done. But, then again, I had a well paying job, and my ability to feed myself for the next week was not dependent on not losing that wallet. Everyone has to make their own decisions based on their own circumstances.

How did we stray so far from the Simunitions scenario? The Hot Dog vendor went from a theft victim to the aggressor, chasing the four guys. This is not the scenario in the video unless after the robber got your money and left you chased him into the parking lot.

In the first scenario, at bad breath distance where he is just showing me what MIGHT be an actual gun, I think a straight arm to the chest that might knock him off balance and/or on his butt would have been the obvious option. From there he cannot take your weapon and you can draw and fire while he fumbles to get his out and from his appendix carry inthe waistband probably shoots his own nuts off.

Option two learned from an SFPD defense class: Comply, take the money from the ATM, since that seems to be what he wants. He still does not have his weapon out. Back away from the machine and let him reach (undoubtedly with his strong hand) for the money. At this point he is distracted and you can either draw on him or run for the hills, your choice, but preferably putting as much of that brick building between you and him as you can as quickly as you can. Another option is to take the money from the machine, hand it to him, but drop it just before he can grab it. Once again his focus is on the money now on the ground and you have opened up new opportunities for yourself. Since the ATM is taking pictures of the encounter I think I like the run for the hills option at this point.

By the way, the SFPD also suggested that if they want your wallet (or purse) you should comply, but while handing it over toss it 15 or 20 feet away, then run the other direction. Ideally the perps focus is on the money/valuables, not you. This scenario works best if the BGs weapon is still holstered as it is likely to piss him off and make him take a shot out of spite. YMMV.

By the way, if there is more than one perp (the other guy in scenario two from the video could very well have been an accomplice) all bets are off. Just give them the money and hope they’re done.

“How did we stray so far from the Simunitions scenario? The Hot Dog vendor went from a theft victim to the aggressor, chasing the four guys.”

No. Just hell no. The vendor is not an aggressor for chasing the guys who stole his phone. This is nanny state thinking. They are thieves, all bets are off especially if they’re making threats or doing harm.

A while ago you had a post about the militarization of the po po. Well I would like to declare that this effect has also spread to the general gun owning populace in the last decade. It is the mantra of “training” aka killing techniques with a gun, the “combat mindset”, the up armoring of everything that comes close to the gun culture.

Listen to guys on the radio these days. Read the various gun blogs. Hear the trainers as they pitch their schools….The schizo view of the world. Whilst crime is down across the board, the hysteria reigns about car jacking, home invasions, kidnappings, kiddy attacks etc. Nearly all the gun companies now market to a fear charged environment. They build firearms for defense/tactical/mil-leo that they sell to little old ladies. How many discussions have you read about 200 and 300 yard shots with 300 win mags? When in civilian life has this happened? You would be arrested for murder if you shot someone at that distance for ANY perceived reason.We see newbies to shooting coming in to shoot IPSC or IDPA or SASS. The visual is to bring the video games to life. Even dressing up like the SASS or Zoot suit stuff and shooting combined. Fantasy come to life. Shooting = killing. When was the last post you saw about kids shooting clays? About the Zen of 3position international smallbore?

Remember that you react as you train. Today the solution to everything is shoot. Shoot until the threat is down and out.

“Kill pussycat kill kill” as a great philosopher once titled his work.

The ability to claim self defense declines rapidly after 10 yards even in a stand your ground state. Unless someone takes you under direct fire you will certainly be charged if you let loose at someone much beyond 10 yards. Most us live in suburban environments at a minimum. You are not just going to satisfy “Rule 3” [know your target and what’s beyond it] at extended ranges. The longest SWAT shot in the DC metro area was 68 yards. I am sure that is true in almost any city.

I see too many TTAG readers talk about using rifles in an urban environment for self defense based on some training video or taking an actual course. Let’s be clear, unless you live in a gang infested neighborhood you will not be facing a “commando” team breaking into your house. If you are unfortunate enough to have someone pay you a visit a pistol or shotgun will get the job done with a minimum chance of killing your neighbor. If you want an advantage and can’t use a shotgun a pistol caliber carbine will do anything an AR can do in your defensive environment.

And remember one more thing. With perhaps the exception of Texas, you are only legally allowed to take defensive measures. You cannot go and counterattack your adversary.

Funny you should mention shooting clays. I smiled when I heard the CEO of Hornady commenting that “3-gun is going to do for the industry what sporting clays did for us a few years back!” And yet the FBI has finally learned that, for handguns, the sensible range of qualification should focus on 3 to 7 yards, noting that 75% of agent-involved shooting was at 3 yards or less. Brings to mind the value of Fairbairn’s emphasis on being able to get an accurate a shot off at the 1/4-raised defensible position and such. Let’s all go practice “pocket pistol at 3 yards on one target!” Not so exciting, eh? Even golf would become boring if all one did is putt.

Car-jacking, hot burglaries: These may be down overall, I don’t know. But I’ve noticed a clear trend of poor perps risking it to move against richer (though better policed) suburban homes and city neighborhoods. Perhaps “Don’t do the crime if they ain’t got a dime!” is the new motto.

This isn’t the first time that TTAG/RF has hated on Tom Gresham or First Person Defender. The videos are useful in that they show certain scenarios with possible outcomes. To deride them because they didnt address every eventuality or variable is to not appreciate what they do and the help they provide. They admit that guns aren’t always the solution. With regards to Jeff at gunblast.com, the greater point that should have been learned was that even the most confident gun educator and gun guy can be learned a thing or two.

I wouldn’t call it hate. I’d call it thoughtful reconsideration. But then I would say that wouldn’t I. Remembering that I’m subject to the same analysis in the comments section.

My issue here is not that they didn’t address every variable. My problem is that I’m not entirely happy with the way they (the trainers) set this one up, or the advice they gave,

For example, official Simunitions teaches instructors not to allow any physical contact between participants. And for good reason. With adrenalin pumping, the level of violence can quickly get out of control. As it SHOULD if you’re using physical force against an attacker. But CAN’T because participants are not wearing proper protective clothing.

Also, again, I believe that compliance—or at least pretend compliance—would have been the better option in the first scenario. YMMV.

Whether you term what RF wrote as “hate” or not, I think the important thing is if it gets you thinking. The guys in the videos don’t necessarily have all the answers, and neither does RF. Also, whatever ends up happening to you in real life may be the exact same general scenario (robbery at an ATM) while differing in every single detail from that presented in the video or training. These videos are not a set of steps to follow, they’re a mental/physical exercise to get you thinking. That way, should it ever happen to you, you’ll have at least some history of considering what to do, rather than being taken completely off guard because you’re blundering through life in condition white.

There is some situational wiggle room for tactics, but my personal policy has always been to respond to violence or threats of violence with uncompromising, instantaneous and overwhelmingly disproportionate violence. I learned as a small boy that fighting back against a bully would buy me a week of peace. Then he’d return with friends. Beating him into a bloody lump long after he stopped fighting would buy me years. Savagery only understands greater savagery.

I do not enjoy violence, but I have trained most of my adult life to inflict it. I have never so much as drawn my weapon as a civilian CPL holder. I hope I never have to. But if that day comes, there will be no warnings, no talk, and no mercy. It matters not whether the situation is over ten thousand dollars or fifty cents. Right is right, wrong is wrong, and no male unwilling to risk life and limb in the service of right has any business calling himself a man.

The spirit of “fighting for what is right” I agree with, and there are clearly times when, unlike the NYC Transit cops, I’d jump in. However, nothing will make you hate the world more than being sure you were fighting for all that is good and noble, only to find out that judge or jury thinks you got it wrong.

If more people voted for what is right and pushed their school districts to do what is right,,oh, and their kids to know right from wrong, then we’d have less of this need to fight for what is right outside of strip malls and doughnut shops.

At what point do you decide “enough is enough” if your initial thought is “It’s just property, not worth their life”? $10? $100? $10,000? Your whole life savings and now you and your family live on the streets? They thought it was worth the risk to their life to attempt to get your belongings, resist with words if able to, resist with force if needed. Obviously doesn’t mean shoot if it can be avoided (hard to defend shooting someone who said “Give me money” in a mean way), but appeasing lead to WW2, appeasing leads to the constant criminal activity we have. Fact is, just because you give it up doesn’t mean they won’t assault or kill you. Are you willing to take that risk?

If you tolerate an attitude or action, they will keep doing it, yet more brazingly.

Additionally, in scenario one the BG obviously was (pretending) he did not expect the victim to be armed, else he would have drawn his weapon, not just shown it holstered. I would think that in most cases where the mere showing of the (possibly a) weapon happens the perp is overconfident that you are not armed. This is a definite advantage to you since his siuational awareness is not at the level it needs to be, but now yours is. The BG is obviously overconfident, as most bullies are, that you will just cower and comply. Acting to the contrary of his expectations now puts him in the role of defender and not aggressor. The major flaw in the video, IMO, is the BG not only knew but pretended not to know the victim was armed, but he knew where the pistol was carried (Left side, not that common) and that it was not in a retention holster. The other problem, as RF mentioned, is the victim could not just beat the guy down and take his pistol.

That is the problem with most exercise scenarios. There are no real surprises because you know the outline of the scenario. It doesn’t mean that there is nothing to be learned just that you can’t predict your actual performance in real life on how it went down in the training scenario.

I participated in a number of nuclear command and control exercises over the years. You were briefed on the where and when you were to evacuate to an “undisclosed location” well in advance. It would have been quite interesting if the they told us one thing and then began the exercise several days before the briefed start date. I would have blown the whistle at 1600 on a Friday and enjoyed the chaos of everyone trying to get to the site in the middle of the rush hour.

The deck is stacked in favor of the villain in these scenarios. In real life the robber would not attempt to rob a person he suspected was armed. For that matter he wouldn’t know his victim is left handed. They’ve retained the element of surprise for the robber but taken it away from the victim. I would advise anyone to go with the odds. Yes there is a slight chance that your attacker is up for a gunfight, but for every time that happens there will be 1000 times the robber will immediately take flight. Now if you wander into the wrong neighborhood in Ciudad Juarez those odds might shift a bit, but for most of us the visual display is all we need.

JQ was right in the second scenario though, if the robber does go after your weapon the most important thing is to retain control over your own weapon at any cost.

Cracks me up how some here are willing to fight for their $500 i-phone because it’s the “moral” thing to do….risking the chance of a broken skull for their trouble. Sometimes just handing it over is the better bet.

It isn’t necessarily about that. There was a lady that got carjacked in an Atlanta suburb earlier in the year. She complied. They shot her in the belly, laughed and drove off. There are plenty of cases of victims being injured or killed, anyway. It is a play it be ear sort of thing.

1: Compliance does not guarantee safety. Not in the least. Anyone who trusts the word of someone already threatening assault or murder needs their head examined.

2: Even if the perp does leave with your phone/wallet/w/e and you are fine, he’s still likely to victimize someone else at some point. They may not be so lucky. If you have the means to stop a criminal, it implies a duty to exercise it. Anything less is cowardly and immoral.

Why is everybody talking about $500.00 phones? The vendor’s phone was probably in the $20 range, and almost certainly less than a hundred. Anyone who is damfool enough to spend five hundred bucks on a phone obviously has more money than sense, and deserves to get ripped off.

Another worthy plug: Target Focus Training. I like the claw to the eyes, but/and the groin was wide open both times too [p.s. there are at least 75 targets on the human body that will allow you to own the bad guy…I know every situation is different, but neutralizing the bad guy’s real weapon, his nervous system rather than his gun, is the wisdom here…]. If bad guy takes time to lift up garment & show his weapon, and briefly take his eyes off his victim, and he’s as close in to the victim as he was, he’s set himself up for a really bad day. Good video, and I’m a fan of “Gunblast guy” too, always something new to learn…

A week ago I got robbed while delivering pizza. People often wait in their yard for the food to arrive, so I opened my door & turned to grab the food when the guy standing in the yard rushed between my door & myself brandishing a knife. I told him it’s not worth it for me to resist. I gave him the $47 in smalls bills. When he persistently asked where the rest was, I gave him a bag of $7 in coins. I followed his instructions to get in the backseat & cover my eyes. He also took my phone. I drove a mile to a gas station & called 911. Feeling powerless is horrible, but I kept my wallet & was able to come to terms with the fact that I’m not Batman. Just one example of how compliance (luckily) worked.

I agree with RF. One of the responsibilities we have is “knowing when to hold, knowing when to fold, knowing when to walk away and when to run, you never count your cards when your sitting at the table…” wait, I’m Kenny Rogering too much.

The vendor made a very bad decision that nearly cost him his life.

I am sorry however that there were no armed citizens around to shoot the dogs beating the man with a ball peen hammer. That would have been a good thing.

Props to Jeff Quinn from Gunblast for putting himself in a situation where he is not “the expert”. Also good to see the emphasis on empty hand combatives, transitioning to weapons, and shooting from retention. I see a lot of folks get their new “defensive” handgun, run their target out to 25 yards and start shooting (usually poorly). As others have observed, the bad guy will typically be within bad breath distance rather than half way down the block.

I’ve done a fair amount of force-on-force training with simunitions. While it is excellent training and I absolutely recommend it, it has it’s limitations. You’re going into every scenario hyped up and expecting a gun fight. You expect the person role-playing the bad guy to have a gun, and the bad guy knows you do. It’s hard for it to not turn into a bunch of people trying to assassinate each other,

I am a disabled ex-police officer. Walking to the ATM is difficult, much less running away. My options of egress are limited so I have to come with as many options as possible to make sure I go home to my beloved daughter at night. Personally, I never go to an ATM in questionable circumstances. If there is anyone else around, it is in the dark, etc., I choose another ATM. I often use the one inside a large shopping center or store. It is just an idea where maybe gunfire will never come into play: Proper Prior Planning Prevents Poor Performance!